More Like This

Preview

Abstract

Aims

Subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (S-ICD) can avoid important complications associated with transvenous leads in patients with inherited primary arrhythmia syndromes, who do not need pacing therapy. Few data are available on the percentage of patients with inherited arrhythmia syndromes eligible for S-ICD implantation. Aim of this study was to analyse the eligibility for S-ICD in a series of patients with Brugada syndrome (BrS), and to compare it with patients with other channelopathies.

Methods...

Abstract

Aims

Subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (S-ICD) can avoid important complications associated with transvenous leads in patients with inherited primary arrhythmia syndromes, who do not need pacing therapy. Few data are available on the percentage of patients with inherited arrhythmia syndromes eligible for S-ICD implantation. Aim of this study was to analyse the eligibility for S-ICD in a series of patients with Brugada syndrome (BrS), and to compare it with patients with other channelopathies.

Methods and results

Patients presenting with BrS, long-QT syndrome (LQTS), early repolarization syndrome (ERS), and idiopathic ventricular fibrillation (IVF) were considered eligible for this study. ECG screening was performed by analysis of QRS complex and T wave morphology recorded in standing and supine position. Eligibility was defined when ≥1 sense vector was acceptable in both supine and standing position. A total of 100 patients (72 males; mean age: 46 ± 17 years) underwent S-ICD sensing screening. Sixty-one patients presented with BrS, 21 with LQTS, 14 with IVF, and 4 with ERS. Thirty-four patients with BrS (56%) presented with spontaneous type 1 ECG. In the other 27 patients (44%), type 1 ECG was unmasked by ajmaline. Overall, rate of screening failure was 13%. Patients with BrS had a higher rate of inappropriate morphology analysis as compared with other channelopathies (18% vs. 5%, P = 0.07) and had a lower number of suitable sensing vectors (49.6% vs. 84.7% vs. P < 0.001). Ajmaline challenge unmasked sensing failure in 14.8% of drug-induced BrS patients previously considered eligible. In all patients, the reason for sensing inappropriateness was due to the presence of high T wave voltages.

Conclusion

S-ICD screening failure occurs in up to 13% of patients with inherited primary arrhythmia syndromes. Patients with BrS present a higher rate of screening failure as compared with other cardiac channelopathies.